G.R. No. L-30255 October 26, 1973
GUILLERMO S. SAPALARAN, plaintiff-appellee, vs. HON. ERNESTO S. MATA, Secretary of National Defense, ET AL., oppositors-appellants.

FACTS

Guillermo S. Sapalaran, a reserve officer, served on active duty from December 1941 to March 1961. After a leave, he returned to active duty in January 1962. He was reverted to inactive status on December 1, 1963, but did not protest this action. He was later recalled to active duty from March 1 to August 31, 1967. On September 1, 1967, he was again reverted to inactive status by order of the Secretary of National Defense. Sapalaran filed a petition for mandamus and damages, challenging this second reversion as improper. He sought reinstatement, payment of back salaries and allowances, and damages. The defense officials argued the reversion was proper under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 2334, which mandates the rotation and reversion of reserve officers.
The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of Sapalaran, ordering his reinstatement and payment of emoluments. The court held he was entitled to the protection of R.A. No. 1382 and relevant provisions of R.A. No. 1600, which shield certain reserve officers with long service from reversion except for cause or upon their own request. The defense officials appealed this decision to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the reversion of Sapalaran to inactive status on September 1, 1967, was lawful under the applicable statutes.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and upheld the lawfulness of Sapalaran’s reversion. The resolution hinged on the proper interpretation and application of R.A. Nos. 1382, 1600, and 2334. R.A. No. 1382, effective June 18, 1955, provided that reserve officers with at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned service on that date were protected from reversion except for cause or upon their request. For computing length of service, six months or more counted as one year. A joint stipulation established that on June 18, 1955, Sapalaran had 8 years, 6 months, and 17 days of service. Applying the six-month rule, this period would be counted as 9 years, not the required 10. Therefore, he did not attain the 10-year threshold on the critical date specified by R.A. No. 1382 and was not entitled to its protective mantle.
Consequently, Sapalaran was subject to the rotation policy under R.A. No. 2334. This law generally limited reserve officers’ active duty tours to two years within any five-year period, except in emergencies or for officers with indispensable technical skills. Sapalaran’s extended tour of active duty beginning in 1967 was not in consonance with this statutory intent. The Court found that his 1967 reversion was a valid implementation of R.A. No. 2334’s mandate. His claim of a prior communication about retention pertained to his uncontested 1963 reversion and did not legally impede the subsequent 1967 deactivation. Thus, the defense officials acted within their authority.